Should Hackers Get Jail Time?
-
His point is that a cheat program is no different to the two analogues which, as you agree, are actually illegal. So so should cheat programs be.
He seems to keep hitting the point that he doesn't want any new laws. The creation of new laws seems to be his soapbox, not the issue of hacking. Whether the charges are civil, criminal or what have you - that is immaterial to me as long as a company has a means to hunt down and destroy people who actively destroy all of that hard work.
-
Blame the developers. They should know by now, what types of hacks are going to be made... These games are sickly expensive. How hard is it really, to make it impossible for a bullet to go through a wall? It sounds REALLY EASY to make it IMPOSSIBLE. Battlefield sucks, and the people who made it suck. From programmer to programmer, they SUCKED and it's (almost) deserved that someone would teach them a lesson. Don't blame the curious smart people, blame the retards who coded the bullet trajectory code.
Nice troll. Let's review, shall we?
ii_noname_ii wrote:
Blame the developers. They should know by now, what types of hacks are going to be made...
They do know. PunkBuster (anti-cheat software) was in place at launch. They've a whole team of people working on the problem.
ii_noname_ii wrote:
These games are sickly expensive. How hard is it really, to make it impossible for a bullet to go through a wall? It sounds REALLY EASY to make it IMPOSSIBLE.
What offends me about this post is that whole teams of very intelligent people work to solve these issues and you write off all those people as "retards". Fortunately, you have the opportunity to show all these "retards" how it's done. I'm sure the gaming industry would love to have your solution and would be willing to pay $$$$$ for it.
ii_noname_ii wrote:
Battlefield sucks, and the people who made it suck. From programmer to programmer, they SUCKED and it's (almost) deserved that someone would teach them a lesson.
Regardless of your poorly informed opinion, Battlefield 3 is a state of the art game with exceptional graphics and game-play. It has sold over 10 million copies and will likely generate a billion dollars net this year. It is one of the most successful franchises in FPS games. I'm sorry that you got owned - maybe you should try an ezmode shooter like COD?
ii_noname_ii wrote:
Don't blame the curious smart people, blame the retards who coded the bullet trajectory code.
So people who write, market, and sell hacks are merely "curious"? In your world I'm sure Hitler wasn't a mass murder, no, he just didn't like Matzah Ball Soup! The thing is, the bullet trajectory code works - it's the hack that breaks it, ya narb. Surely you can understand how hacking a system could cause it to not work properly, which is, of course, the point of the hack in the first place.
-
MehGerbil wrote:
Too harsh?
Uh... yes.
MehGerbil wrote:
It's like they wake up and think: Oh, a new game. How can I ruin it for thousands of people?
But that's not what they're thinking at all. They are thinking that they are very good at this and they can make some money or impress some people with their cleverness. Really: they're not out to get you (well, some are) at all. Your ire should be directed at the game maker for allowing these hacks in the first place. The game makers are the ones who should go to jail (just kidding).
m.bergman
For Bruce Schneier, quanta only have one state : afraid.
To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered. -- Voltaire
Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defense. -- Steve Landesberg
It seems pretty clear from the diversity and tone of the replies that there are two camps here. One of people who have become frustrated by a poor online experience, and the other who seem rather blase about it, to the point where I would have to assume, since they see nothing wrong with the practice, that perhaps they too have used these hacks. Aside from the likelihood that the hack-users are probably losers in real life (since one can only hold down a decent job for so long as an active fraud), they are also diminshing the community they play in. The most affected are those who are not themselves extremely skilled - who are also mosg likely newer players. If you deter newer players, then you shrink the hobby. If you shrink the hobby, then you end up with less places to play, and less opponents to face, until you are in a pool with nothing but other hackers. Perhaps that is punishment enough - but it fails to address the real money and time invested by people trying to enjoy the hobby without cheating.
-
Nice troll. Let's review, shall we?
ii_noname_ii wrote:
Blame the developers. They should know by now, what types of hacks are going to be made...
They do know. PunkBuster (anti-cheat software) was in place at launch. They've a whole team of people working on the problem.
ii_noname_ii wrote:
These games are sickly expensive. How hard is it really, to make it impossible for a bullet to go through a wall? It sounds REALLY EASY to make it IMPOSSIBLE.
What offends me about this post is that whole teams of very intelligent people work to solve these issues and you write off all those people as "retards". Fortunately, you have the opportunity to show all these "retards" how it's done. I'm sure the gaming industry would love to have your solution and would be willing to pay $$$$$ for it.
ii_noname_ii wrote:
Battlefield sucks, and the people who made it suck. From programmer to programmer, they SUCKED and it's (almost) deserved that someone would teach them a lesson.
Regardless of your poorly informed opinion, Battlefield 3 is a state of the art game with exceptional graphics and game-play. It has sold over 10 million copies and will likely generate a billion dollars net this year. It is one of the most successful franchises in FPS games. I'm sorry that you got owned - maybe you should try an ezmode shooter like COD?
ii_noname_ii wrote:
Don't blame the curious smart people, blame the retards who coded the bullet trajectory code.
So people who write, market, and sell hacks are merely "curious"? In your world I'm sure Hitler wasn't a mass murder, no, he just didn't like Matzah Ball Soup! The thing is, the bullet trajectory code works - it's the hack that breaks it, ya narb. Surely you can understand how hacking a system could cause it to not work properly, which is, of course, the point of the hack in the first place.
Ok. But my opinion hasn't changed. The superteams of people you mention got outsmarted by ONE person. Fire the team, hire the ONE person who beat them all. That whole team, "punkbuster": FAIL. "
Quote:
I'm sure the gaming industry would love to have your solution and would be willing to pay $$$$$ for it.
" Sure. Hire me. But I already make a good living making software that works better than what whole teams make. I'm not cheap though. They'd have to be prepared to pay me real good to steal me from my current job, that I love. AND they'd have to be prepared to not have access to my source code, as I would consider every "team member" a security risk. Be as offended as you want, these "teams" do not impress me one bit. They failed. I've seen how large software companies work. It's hilarious and unefficient.
-
I've been enjoying online games for about 12 years. In every online game I've played sooner or later someone develops a hack (aimbot, speed hack, etc) and makes a little bit of money marketing it to other players. For a recent example see the Mass Murder hack for Battlefield 3: Mass Murder[^] There are a couple of things that I understand: 1: I understand developing such a hack can be a fun challenge. 2: I understand that the hack has a humorous side to it. That said, in the end a bunch of paying customers for a company are having their entertainment ruined by people who obviously have no interest in playing the game with any integrity. Time and time again I've seen hundreds, and even thousands of people, disrupted because of these sorts of hacks. This seems to be a threat to real people's livelyhood and it ruins the fun for many paying customers. I know it seems draconian, but I'd like to see hard jail time for the people who develop these programs. Somehow, I think if I could program McDonald's coffee machines to spray the interior of restaurant that I'd get some jail time for that behavior. If I could program Ford automobiles to flash their lights randomly or cause city buses to be late there would also be severe punishment. Maybe I'm getting old - but one thing I really dislike about the internet is the sub-culture that seems to feed off making other people's lives miserable. It would be nice to read about these "shops" getting busted up and some hacker kiddies getting slapped around a bit. I realize the hacks are not dangerous and these are games, it's just the opportunistic mindset of a n'vr-do-well that bugs me to no end. It's like they wake up and think: Oh, a new game. How can I ruin it for thousands of people? Weeding these folks out of the gene pool would be good for the long term success of human kind. Too harsh?
"Maybe I'm getting old" - ouch. Not that! Hey, getting old or staying young doesn't matter - wanting to do the right thing can be desirous at any age. (Gamle == old in Norwegian). Anyway, hackers are just an amazing bunch; they're just [juvenile] deliquents. I agree - send 'em to jail. But you're gonna have a hard time jailing people from all corners of the [small] planet. Pretty harsh ... but not too harsh.
-
Ok. But my opinion hasn't changed. The superteams of people you mention got outsmarted by ONE person. Fire the team, hire the ONE person who beat them all. That whole team, "punkbuster": FAIL. "
Quote:
I'm sure the gaming industry would love to have your solution and would be willing to pay $$$$$ for it.
" Sure. Hire me. But I already make a good living making software that works better than what whole teams make. I'm not cheap though. They'd have to be prepared to pay me real good to steal me from my current job, that I love. AND they'd have to be prepared to not have access to my source code, as I would consider every "team member" a security risk. Be as offended as you want, these "teams" do not impress me one bit. They failed. I've seen how large software companies work. It's hilarious and unefficient.
-
How about not using the hack yourself and just playing the game as it was meant to be played?
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
Love your tag from Hitchens, just had to mention that the nutcase radio I listen to for entertainment's sake and to see how these bozos attempt to internalize and justify their bizarre worldview (AFR - American Family Radio)[^] One of their commentators, Crane Durham, in his "Nothing But Truth" (which I view as anything but), asserted that "Even Christopher Hitchens will admit there is a God now." I thought that was priceless. Since he is dead now, we can make any statement we want because he is not around to argue it.
Psychosis at 10 Film at 11 Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it. Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
-
Scenerio: 1: You and your friends invest big $$$ to develop a game. 2: You and your friends work endless hours on the game. 3: You and your friends invest additional $$$ to market the game. 4: You and your friends get 100,000 happy customers. Then some chuckle-head puts together a hack in his spare time and is now making money off a cheat that allows a small percentage of your customers to make thousands of your honest customers angry. Questions: How much income would such a cheat have to cost you before you saw it has a problem? How much developer time would you have to waste addressing these hacks (instead of adding new content) before you saw this has a problem? Serious questions - because I don't understand the mindset that holds that freedom includes the right to destroy other people's work.
-
Love your tag from Hitchens, just had to mention that the nutcase radio I listen to for entertainment's sake and to see how these bozos attempt to internalize and justify their bizarre worldview (AFR - American Family Radio)[^] One of their commentators, Crane Durham, in his "Nothing But Truth" (which I view as anything but), asserted that "Even Christopher Hitchens will admit there is a God now." I thought that was priceless. Since he is dead now, we can make any statement we want because he is not around to argue it.
Psychosis at 10 Film at 11 Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it. Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
Thanks :) Towards the end of his life Hitchens admitted that when he was near the end, out of frailness, he might say something that led others to believe that he believed in God. He then went on to say that people were not to use this as an excuse to claim that he was now 'saved'. I certainly did not agree with all that he said, however I found him to be brave, intelligent and did agree with a lot of what he said. People like Daniel Dennett are still around to carry the flame :)
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
gstolarov wrote:
I think there is no arguing that Windows today are safer and more stable than any other environment
Splutters coffee into keyboard - you are kidding right? I like Windows, use and develop for it regularly, but if you seriously think it comes close to being as you describe, I'd never let you work on my servers.
I did Unix, Linux, AIX, and now trying OSX. My impression is - it's all depends on how much you pile up on it. And as far as as can see nothing can compare to Windows by universality. I mean we all expect to go and get $5 video card, $40 hard drive from unknown manufacturer, random app off the web and expect Window to take it. Not really the case for other environments. And even at that the machines can and do go on for a while assuming you don't futz with it - recently I had a Windows 2003 server hard drive crash on the machine that was setup by the person who quit 4 years ago, had to be rebooted twice during this time and no one remembers where it is - and this is not an exception as I can see for an average Windows server. And also spilling coffee onto the hardware....
-
I did Unix, Linux, AIX, and now trying OSX. My impression is - it's all depends on how much you pile up on it. And as far as as can see nothing can compare to Windows by universality. I mean we all expect to go and get $5 video card, $40 hard drive from unknown manufacturer, random app off the web and expect Window to take it. Not really the case for other environments. And even at that the machines can and do go on for a while assuming you don't futz with it - recently I had a Windows 2003 server hard drive crash on the machine that was setup by the person who quit 4 years ago, had to be rebooted twice during this time and no one remembers where it is - and this is not an exception as I can see for an average Windows server. And also spilling coffee onto the hardware....
Hardware compatibility != safety/stability. Yes, Windows runs on lots more hardware, but that's an entirely different issue. If you run, for example, SE Linux on supported hardware and configure it correctly its virtually impossible to hack. I cannot imagine any Windows version where that could be said.
-
Every game I know has botting as an insta-ban offence. But they can be hard to detect and ban evasion can be almost impossible to prevent, particularly given dynamic IPs and VMs.
I guess that's unsurprising, otherwise there wouldn't be much of a problem. To be honest - I tend to avoid online games for a combination of reasons, much as I avoid many online forums, just because I find many people who frequent such things intolerable. Code Project is one exception to the latter, but so far I've not perservered with any game long enough to find one tolerable. I do enjoy gaming, but gave up with net games at about Quake III.
-
Legally you are right, but then don't forget that much hacking software is also used for security testing. Morally.. hell no.
In this case, I think morality and legality happen to agree (there are many cases where I don't think they agree). You'll have to explain yourself rather than say 'hell no' before I think you have a real point. Secondly.. are you saying the hacking software is released by these companies? Pretty sure that is not the case. And given that they don't, it just reinforces my point. If the security companies understand it only has malicious intent when 'released into the wild'.. it is further proof that those that *do* release it *do* have malicious intent. I know folks that work in that part of the software industry. Its a constant battle to keep up.. and they take all that very seriously. Again, your points are falling flat.
-
I've been enjoying online games for about 12 years. In every online game I've played sooner or later someone develops a hack (aimbot, speed hack, etc) and makes a little bit of money marketing it to other players. For a recent example see the Mass Murder hack for Battlefield 3: Mass Murder[^] There are a couple of things that I understand: 1: I understand developing such a hack can be a fun challenge. 2: I understand that the hack has a humorous side to it. That said, in the end a bunch of paying customers for a company are having their entertainment ruined by people who obviously have no interest in playing the game with any integrity. Time and time again I've seen hundreds, and even thousands of people, disrupted because of these sorts of hacks. This seems to be a threat to real people's livelyhood and it ruins the fun for many paying customers. I know it seems draconian, but I'd like to see hard jail time for the people who develop these programs. Somehow, I think if I could program McDonald's coffee machines to spray the interior of restaurant that I'd get some jail time for that behavior. If I could program Ford automobiles to flash their lights randomly or cause city buses to be late there would also be severe punishment. Maybe I'm getting old - but one thing I really dislike about the internet is the sub-culture that seems to feed off making other people's lives miserable. It would be nice to read about these "shops" getting busted up and some hacker kiddies getting slapped around a bit. I realize the hacks are not dangerous and these are games, it's just the opportunistic mindset of a n'vr-do-well that bugs me to no end. It's like they wake up and think: Oh, a new game. How can I ruin it for thousands of people? Weeding these folks out of the gene pool would be good for the long term success of human kind. Too harsh?
The game is implemented wrong. The clients are responsible for the wrong things and the server doesn't check that they aren't hacked (or does so in an easy-to-defeat way). These are noob SW design mistakes, so the implementors are complicit in this. If you send the hackers to jail, then you need to send the implementors too, and then who'd be left to implement the next game (and who would want to take the risk). You can get all worked up about this, or you can vote with your feet and move along to a new game implemented by a different team. Continuing to play this game is only making it more valuable to the implementors, validating their decision to not care too much about when hacks appear and how disruptive they become.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
-
I don't think it can be called ragequitting if your girlfriend entices you away from the game. We need a new word for this. brewquit, sexquit, lifequit?
-
In this case, I think morality and legality happen to agree (there are many cases where I don't think they agree). You'll have to explain yourself rather than say 'hell no' before I think you have a real point. Secondly.. are you saying the hacking software is released by these companies? Pretty sure that is not the case. And given that they don't, it just reinforces my point. If the security companies understand it only has malicious intent when 'released into the wild'.. it is further proof that those that *do* release it *do* have malicious intent. I know folks that work in that part of the software industry. Its a constant battle to keep up.. and they take all that very seriously. Again, your points are falling flat.
-
The game is implemented wrong. The clients are responsible for the wrong things and the server doesn't check that they aren't hacked (or does so in an easy-to-defeat way). These are noob SW design mistakes, so the implementors are complicit in this. If you send the hackers to jail, then you need to send the implementors too, and then who'd be left to implement the next game (and who would want to take the risk). You can get all worked up about this, or you can vote with your feet and move along to a new game implemented by a different team. Continuing to play this game is only making it more valuable to the implementors, validating their decision to not care too much about when hacks appear and how disruptive they become.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
One of the most common hacks is a radar hack. Since the server has to send the location of other players to the client I don't see how you'd prevent a 3rd party program from gathering that information and displaying all of it in a way that gives teh cheater an advantage. I don't think there is a single FPS that has been developed yet that hasn't been hacked. Based on your post I either have to write off every single game studio as being populated by slack-jawed morons or I have to accept the fact that preventing cheating is a bit more complex than what you suggest.
-
His point is that a cheat program is no different to the two analogues which, as you agree, are actually illegal. So so should cheat programs be.
a cheat program is no different to the two analogues which, as you agree, are actually illegal.
They are different. A cheat program changes game play. It may violate a civil contract but it does not steal money or a service. It changes the experience of game play, that's it. No free petrol. No transfer of funds out of a victim's account. Some cheat programs have legitimate uses in testing and QA. A game engine company sells you a 3D game engine with tools to expedite testing. Those same tools could be used to cheat. Should the game engine designers be arrested for providing these extra tools? Law makers would have a tough time drafting language to distinguish between the two. I agree that playing with cheats is no fun. Someone ruined your afternoon of game play. It sucks. I'm sorry. Bottom line - for me - is this is a civil matter. The game industry should handle this issue on it's own. Gerbil is correct to say I don't want new laws. I'd like to see some old, obsolete US laws removed (but that's another story). That's my position. If you think a law is needed, how would that work? How would you structure the language so that the people creating the games aren't themselves criminalized thereby stifling game quality, innovation, and competition.
-
I've been enjoying online games for about 12 years. In every online game I've played sooner or later someone develops a hack (aimbot, speed hack, etc) and makes a little bit of money marketing it to other players. For a recent example see the Mass Murder hack for Battlefield 3: Mass Murder[^] There are a couple of things that I understand: 1: I understand developing such a hack can be a fun challenge. 2: I understand that the hack has a humorous side to it. That said, in the end a bunch of paying customers for a company are having their entertainment ruined by people who obviously have no interest in playing the game with any integrity. Time and time again I've seen hundreds, and even thousands of people, disrupted because of these sorts of hacks. This seems to be a threat to real people's livelyhood and it ruins the fun for many paying customers. I know it seems draconian, but I'd like to see hard jail time for the people who develop these programs. Somehow, I think if I could program McDonald's coffee machines to spray the interior of restaurant that I'd get some jail time for that behavior. If I could program Ford automobiles to flash their lights randomly or cause city buses to be late there would also be severe punishment. Maybe I'm getting old - but one thing I really dislike about the internet is the sub-culture that seems to feed off making other people's lives miserable. It would be nice to read about these "shops" getting busted up and some hacker kiddies getting slapped around a bit. I realize the hacks are not dangerous and these are games, it's just the opportunistic mindset of a n'vr-do-well that bugs me to no end. It's like they wake up and think: Oh, a new game. How can I ruin it for thousands of people? Weeding these folks out of the gene pool would be good for the long term success of human kind. Too harsh?
If companies would start interpreting these folk as misguided genius (provided that they are the ones that wrote the 'sploit), then I'm sure that it would put a damper on the overall scheme of it. There is that sense of mistrust, however. In a way it is much like interpreting drug kingpins as great businessmen (able to handle a lot of stress, great organizational skills). But comfort to some is worth more than a "life of crime". Successfully "weeding" out THESE individuals would be worthwhile to the overall economy. The FBI already does this at Defcon. You mention genes in this. I'm sure that law enforcement is interested in identifying that "criminal gene", and they are indeed serious about it - in the United States they collect DNA from criminals after a felony is committed. However, I am sure that their system is not perfect. I'm sure they would be able to find this gene in those that follow dangerous pursuits in life, such as stock market warriors.